From the Faraway Nearby Finding Time The fast, the bad, the ugly, the
alternatives by Rebecca Solnit Published in the September/October
2007<http://www.orionmagazine.org/index.php/mag/issue/333/>issue of
*Orion* magazine


THE FOUR HORSEMEN OF MY APOCALYPSE are called Efficiency, Convenience,
Profitability, and Security, and in their names, crimes against poetry,
pleasure, sociability, and the very largeness of the world are daily,
hourly, constantly carried out. These marauding horsemen are deployed by
technophiles, advertisers, and profiteers to assault the nameless pleasures
and meanings that knit together our lives and expand our horizons.

I'm listening to a man on the radio describe how great it is that there are
websites where musicians who have never met or conversed or had any contact
at all can lay down tracks together to make songs. While the experiment
sounds interesting, the assumption sounds scary--that the complex personal,
creative, and cultural collaborations of music-making could be unnecessary
and you just need the digital conjunction of some skill sets. The speaker
seems to believe that the sole goal is the production of songs, sundered
from the production of social ties and social pleasure. But music has always
been an occasion for people to get together--in rehearsals, nightclubs,
parties, festivals, park band-shells, parades, and other social spaces. It
is often the soundtrack to bodies in conjunction, whether marching or making
love.

Ensemble music made in solitude is a very different thing; as a norm it
signifies a loss. The loss is subtle and hard to describe, especially
compared to the wonders of what can be uploaded, downloaded, and Googled,
and the convenience and safety of never leaving your house or never meeting
a stranger. The radio rave comes a few days after I talk to a book editor
who's trying to articulate what goes missing when you go to
Amazon.com<http://amazon.com/>for books: the absence of the
opportunities for browsing, for finding what
you don't know you're looking for or can't describe in a key-word search. A
digital storefront can lead you to your goal if you know exactly how to
spell it, but it shows you next to nothing on the way; it prevents your
world from getting significantly or surprisingly larger. The virtual version
rips out the heart of the thing, shrink-wraps it, sticks a barcode on, and
throws the rest away. This horseman is called Efficiency. He is followed by
the horseman called Profitability. Along with Convenience, they trample
underfoot the subtle encounters that suffuse a life with meaning.

The problem is partly one of language. The language of commerce has been
engineered to describe the overt purpose of a thing, but cannot encompass
fringe benefits or peripheral pleasures. It weighs the obvious against what
in its terms are incomprehensible. When I drive from here to there, speed,
privacy, control, and safety are easy to claim. When I walk, what happens is
more vague, more ambiguous--and in many circumstances much richer. I am out
in the world. It's exercise, though not so quantifiably as on a treadmill in
a gym with a digital readout. It's myriad little epiphanies and encounters
that knit me more tightly into my place and maybe enhance the place overall.
The carbon emissions are essentially nil. Many more benefits are more
subjective, more ethereal--and more wordy. You can't describe them in a few
familiar phrases; and if you're not practiced at describing them, you may
not be able to articulate them at all. It is difficult to value what cannot
be named. Since someone makes money every time you buy a car or fill it up,
there's a whole commercial language built around getting us to drive;
there's little or no language promoting the free act of walking. Have you
not driven a Ford lately?

Even the idea of security illustrates the constant conflict between the
familiar and the intricate. When I drive, I have a large steel and glass
carapace wrapped around me and my contact with other human beings is largely
limited to colliding with their large metal carapaces at various speeds or
their unbuffered bodies in crosswalks. Fifty thousand or so people a year
are killed by cars in this country, but its citizens officially believe that
safety lies in the lack of contact that cars offer. Walkers make a place
safer for the whole community--what Jane Jacobs called "eyes on the
street"--and in turn become more street-smart themselves. Too, safety is a
reductive term for what being at home in the world or the neighborhood can
provide. This is a more nebulous kind of security, but a deeper and broader
one. It is marked by expansiveness, not defensiveness.

Walking versus driving is an easy setup, but the same problem applies to
most of the technological changes we embrace and many of the material and
spatial ones. The gains are simple and we know the adjectives: convenient,
efficient, safe, fast, predictable, productive. All good things for a
machine, but lost in the list is the language to argue that we are not
machines and our lives include all sorts of subtleties--epiphanies,
alliances, associations, meanings, purposes, pleasures--that engineers cannot
design, factories cannot build, computers cannot measure, and marketers will
not sell. What we cannot describe vanishes into the ether, and so what
begins as a problem of language ends as one of the broadest tragedies of our
lives.

This is most manifest in the life of the suburban commuter who weekly spends
a dozen or more hours on the road between the putative dream house and the
workplace, caught in the gridlock of tens of thousands likewise trying to
move from the residential-warehousing periphery to the economically
productive inner rings. Space is quantifiable and we are constantly taught
to covet it (though leisure is advertised too--mostly as vacation packages).
You can own those two thousand square feet including two-car garage, and it
is literally real, the real in real estate. But to have this space you give
up time, the time that you might be spending with the kids who are housed in
the image of domestic tranquility but not actually particularly well
nurtured by their absentee parents, or time spent immersed in community life
or making things with your own hands or doing nothing at all--a lost art. You
give up time, and you often give up the far more than two thousand square
feet that you don't own but get to enjoy when you live in, say, a rented
apartment in a neighborhood full of amenities nobody advertised to you,
because you don't have to buy the public pool or playground that your kids
don't need to be driven to. The language of real-estate ownership is loud,
clear, and drilled into us daily; the language of public life and leisure
time is rarer and more complex.

People elsewhere are better at this language. At a certain fork in the road
of automatization, Europeans chose to have more time, and they work far less
than we do and get much longer vacations. We chose to have more stuff, the
stuff sold to us through those beckoning adjectives--bigger, better, faster:
Jet Skis, extra cars, second homes, motor homes, towering slab TVs, if not
the time to enjoy them or to enjoy less commodified pleasures. These may be
the wages of inarticulateness.

The conundrum is that the language to describe the ineffable splendors and
possibilities of our lives takes time to master, takes a certain unhurried
engagement with the tasks of description, assessment, critique, and
conversation; that to speak this slow language you must slow down, and to
slow down you must have some inkling of what you will gain by doing so. It's
not an elite language; nomadic and remote tribal peoples are now quite good
at picking and choosing from development's cascade of new toys, and so are
some of the cash-poor, culture-rich people in places like Louisiana. Poetry
is good training in speaking it, and skepticism is helpful in rejecting the
four horsemen of this apocalypse, but they both require a mind that likes to
roam around and the time in which to do it.

Ultimately, I believe that slowness is an act of resistance, not because
slowness is a good in itself but because of all that it makes room for, the
things that don't get measured and can't be bought.

*Rebecca Solnit* tried to write about the uses of the unpredictable and the
immeasurable in her book *A Field Guide to Getting Lost*. Before that she
wrote a history of walking.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
 To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
 To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to